Endovaginal ultrasound-assisted pain mapping in endometriosis and chronic pelvic pain

J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013 Oct;33(7):715-9. doi: 10.3109/01443615.2013.821971.

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine if the combination of tenderness-guided endovaginal ultrasound and digital pelvic exam (i.e. EVUS-assisted exam) for preoperative pain mapping, in cases without nodules or endometriomas, increases sensitivity/specificity for laparoscopic findings. This was a retrospective review of women with chronic pelvic pain ± infertility with preoperative pain mapping exam prior to laparoscopy (n = 97, 2006-7). Predictor variables (EVUS-assisted exam vs digital pelvic exam alone, for pain mapping) were coded as tender vs non-tender. Primary outcome was findings on laparoscopy (e.g. endometriosis or adhesions) and was coded as abnormal vs normal. We found that EVUS-assisted exam had greater sensitivity (0.81, 95% CI: 0.70-0.89) for abnormal laparoscopy compared with digital pelvic exam alone (0.58, 95% CI: 0.46-0.69) (McNemar's test, p < 0.001). Specificity was limited for both types of pain mapping (0.22, 95% CI: 0.08-0.44 for EVUS-assisted; and 0.39, 95% CI: 0.20-0.61 for digital), with no significant difference (p = 0.13). In conclusion, in the absence of nodules or endometriomas, EVUS-assisted exam increases sensitivity, but with no benefit in specificity, for prediction of abnormal laparoscopy.

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Chronic Pain / diagnostic imaging
  • Chronic Pain / surgery
  • Endometriosis / diagnostic imaging*
  • Endometriosis / surgery
  • Female
  • Gynecological Examination / methods*
  • Humans
  • Infertility, Female / diagnostic imaging*
  • Infertility, Female / surgery
  • Laparoscopy
  • Pelvic Pain / diagnostic imaging*
  • Pelvic Pain / surgery
  • Preoperative Care
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Ultrasonography
  • Young Adult